Memory Alpha:Category suggestions
In-universe categories Acronyms This may be more appropriate for a list page than a category, but I didn't know where else to suggest it. I looked up "acronym" and there are some articles that say "(abcdefg) was an acronym for (list of terms)". So a category for every phrase more commonly/only known by an acronym or a list (if such a thing doesn't exist)? --LauraCC (talk) 17:53, December 15, 2015 (UTC) :Not yet sure I see the benefit. Examples? -- sulfur (talk) 20:46, December 15, 2015 (UTC) Well, like MACO or TCARS. There's a page for Klingonese with a table list of words and their definitions, even though some of these words have their own pages. --LauraCC (talk) 20:56, December 15, 2015 (UTC) ::There are enough for a cat, as this covers pretty much everything using a "blank" sortkey in starship classifications category, but this mostly covers redirects outside of those, as page titles should be the whole phrase if we know it. Since these are mostly "invisible" in the latter sense, I would support a category for these to make finding them easier. - 03:25, December 16, 2015 (UTC) Some are listed on the starfleet agencies template, but this would help find non-starfleet acronyms too, like CPR etc. --LauraCC (talk) 20:24, December 18, 2015 (UTC) Any more support votes? --LauraCC (talk) 15:41, January 8, 2016 (UTC) Insects Might be useful sub cat of animals. --LauraCC (talk) 21:45, January 17, 2016 (UTC) Though, maybe Category: Invertebrates might work. --LauraCC (talk) 18:59, January 20, 2016 (UTC) Here's the list, User:LauraCC/Insects. --LauraCC (talk) 18:43, January 22, 2016 (UTC) :Fyi, worms aren't insects. -- Capricorn (talk) 17:12, January 24, 2016 (UTC) Thanks for the heads up. We could start with "Earth insects" for now until it's clear where other alien species belong. --LauraCC (talk) 17:59, January 26, 2016 (UTC) :I doubt we'll ever know where other alien species belong if we can't know it now. That's a concern I have, just because something is called Betelgeuzian maggot or something, can we be sure enough to classify something we know nothing about that as part of the insect class of the arthropod phylum as known on Earth. The precedents of category:felines and canines‎ would suggest yes, but still... :But I do like the less risque option of "Earth insects", support on that one. -- Capricorn (talk) 18:25, January 29, 2016 (UTC) Any other support's for this? Geoscience split Could we split geology and weather into subcats? --LauraCC (talk) 18:43, February 4, 2016 (UTC) There's lots of storms on the list. --LauraCC (talk) 18:35, February 6, 2016 (UTC) :'Support Geology and Meteorology subcats. - 05:05, February 26, 2016 (UTC) Psychological conditions A subcat both of medical conditions and psychology, which would include things like Claustrophobia. Psychology itself should be psychological concepts and testing, such as Directed dreaming and Intelligence quotient are, etc.--LauraCC (talk) 21:50, February 9, 2016 (UTC) :Support. Has the added benefit that you can just add that new category under psychology too, so you don't have to list categories under both "Medical conditions" and "Psychology". One note, maybe "Psychological disorders" might be a better name, since that term was actually used on Trek. -- Capricorn (talk) 10:29, February 10, 2016 (UTC) ::Support with either name. - 05:05, February 26, 2016 (UTC) Well, Barclay does use my term in , though he means his own general condition, not a specific one. --LauraCC (talk) 20:17, March 1, 2016 (UTC) Tools image categories Do things that go in tools really belong in image category technology? --LauraCC (talk) 16:55, February 26, 2016 (UTC) Things like forks, spoons, etc should have a subcat of this category. There's 1,000 images in this category. --LauraCC (talk) 20:15, February 27, 2016 (UTC) :Support: I suppose the existence of the tools category demonstrates the utility of this idea -- Capricorn (talk) 03:34, February 28, 2016 (UTC) Homeworlds See Talk: Gosis' species homeworld for details. --LauraCC (talk) 21:50, February 27, 2016 (UTC) :Support -- Capricorn (talk) 03:34, February 28, 2016 (UTC) Medical conditions image category I'm sure images of injuries, such as this one and those of individuals afflicted with an illness with visual symptoms like this would belong in a medical condition category. Or would "medicine" be the best? That's what I'm doing now. --LauraCC (talk) 18:30, February 29, 2016 (UTC) Avians To match Category:Canines and Category:Felines. There should be enough birds to justify, right? --LauraCC (talk) 19:20, March 1, 2016 (UTC) Subcat "Human holograms" For all pages marked "Humans" and "Holograms". I refer you to Talk: Gaunt Gary for details. --LauraCC (talk) 19:30, March 1, 2016 (UTC) :See here and here. - 19:51, March 1, 2016 (UTC) We have "Art" and "Earth art". I'm not suggesting a myriad of splinter categories, just this one to be consistent. --LauraCC (talk) 19:54, March 1, 2016 (UTC) :Consistent with what? It can only be one or the other, not both. - 19:57, March 1, 2016 (UTC) Holographic representations of humans as opposed to Klingons or made-up species. --LauraCC (talk) 19:58, March 1, 2016 (UTC) :In-universe categories are in-universe, so there is no difference between Humans and the rest. That's not the reason there's an Earth art category, it because there are enough pages to warrant one, and the Humans category needs to be removed from pages that are about a Hologram that just happens to look Human. There may be pages where the article is about both a Human and a Hologram and the hologram isn't just a holographic duplicate, but that would require a different solution. - 20:12, March 1, 2016 (UTC) ::Comment: I imagine Gaunt Gary was categorized as both because he is: there's a hologram on Voyager, which was said to be based on a real historic figure. Whether those two deserve to share a page is another question, but that would probably be why it has two categories. -- Capricorn (talk) 04:48, March 2, 2016 (UTC) :The current reasoning for not having a separate page for a holographic duplicate without agency (something worth mentioning other than they exsisted and acted as their real counterpart would) I think remains valid, but if categorization is an issue, a redirect with the hologram disambig can be created so that page can be in the Holograms category. At that point though, it might be better to have a Holographic duplicate category to complement the list. - 04:58, March 3, 2016 (UTC) Personnel lists *USS Excelsior personnel *USS Kelvin personnel *USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-C) personnel Based on these pages. - 17:11, March 5, 2016 (UTC) :Not sure what you're suggesting? We have Category:Personnel lists. Tom (talk) 17:22, March 5, 2016 (UTC) Categories like Category:USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) personnel. - 17:25, March 5, 2016 (UTC) :Understood. Then support. Tom (talk) 17:27, March 5, 2016 (UTC) Production POV categories Collectible companies For pages in both Category:Collectibles and Category:Companies. - 00:31, February 15, 2015 (UTC) :Something we should've had a while ago -- but an optimal solution here would be to break up the company from the product. The company would fall into 'collectible companies', and then have a product page that can be the current 'catalogue' section of each page now fall into the collectibles. -- sulfur (talk) 03:47, February 15, 2015 (UTC) ::I agree. I'm thinking a page for each "product line." For example: Johnny Lightning could be split to Legends of Star Trek (standard releases) and Legends Of Star Trek (White Lightning releases) or just Legends of Star Trek (Johnny Lightning). We could also just have a Johnny Lightning catalog or Johnny Lightning merchandise page, which would might make more sense for pages like Genki Wear and Kraft, which don't have "named product lines," or much of a "line" at all. - 04:29, February 15, 2015 (UTC) ::Support, though a bit tentatively. While the suggestion ties in nicely with that of publishers and books/magazines, I'm a bit concerned with the split application resulting in a large number of additional "stub" pages the Kraft and Genki examples...I like the second subordinate suggestion, but propose Johnny Lightning product lines instead "catalog" or "merchandise". To my ears the latter two would sound too much like commercially "peddling" stuff--Sennim (talk) 11:38, February 16, 2015‎ (UTC) ::Support - I prefer the "... product lines" suggestion as well. -- Renegade54 (talk) 19:04, November 12, 2015 (UTC) Maintenance categories Split Comic series into subcats One for each corresponding show series it encompasses and one for the Alternate reality? --LauraCC (talk) 20:28, December 15, 2015 (UTC) :Too many fall across shows to have show versions. Perhaps by publisher, but I'm not a big fan of that idea either. :The only one that I don't mind the sound of it alt reality vs prime reality. -- sulfur (talk) 20:45, December 15, 2015 (UTC) I agree. But certain comics such as Star Trek: Countdown (omnibus) would fall into both categories, as some of it takes place in the prime universe's future. Other than that, not a lot of crossover. --LauraCC (talk) 15:50, December 31, 2015 (UTC) So are we good to go with this? --LauraCC (talk) 15:41, January 8, 2016 (UTC) :I'm not yet convinced on this. I think that it's more beneficial to break down by publisher, but a prime v alternate reality listing may work. I'm not totally certain of the value though. -- sulfur (talk) 15:43, January 8, 2016 (UTC)